Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I am the last person standing and many of my questions have been answered so I will not detain the witnesses or the Chairman. I thank the delegation as this has been a very clear-headed and lucid presentation that has gone a long way towards helping my understanding of the matter, and particularly the timelines. It was a very good idea to give us the timelines in respect of the company's involvement with the national broadband plan. There is a very clear message from the witnesses that it was two years ago and they are talking about the future. It is a very unambiguous message.

Having said that, I might detain the witnesses a while longer to help my understanding of the engagement with the Department up to the point in September 2017 when SIRO withdrew from the process. I am trying to imagine myself in the room where SIRO is engaging with the Department after the mapping exercise has been done and there is a revised intervention area. How did it come about that the company decided it was out and finished with the process? Is it because, as the witnesses stated earlier, the revenue reduction was such that it would just make it untenable? Was there any profit or return on investment where it could be said that even with the 542,000 premises in the amber area, the company could still persevere with the process? I may not be putting it across very clearly but what would it have taken for SIRO to have stayed in the game? That is the kernel of my question.

Mr. O'Leary has stated "it would also have led to a much bigger reduction in revenue and thus our overall potential target revenues were significantly reduced also". He also outlined the Mitchelstown example, which is fairly close to home for me, and the doughnut effect. At what point did the company say "that is it, we are gone". There was engagement and the witnesses have said it was a positive engagement with the Department. The company had just seen 300,000 connections being taken up by another entity so what would it have made this commercially viable for the company? I still cannot fully grapple that. Personally, I found it a pity that SIRO pulled out because of its international reputation, which was mentioned earlier, and the ability to get projects done in a very seamless and quick fashion. That is why there was a certain amount of disappointment.